Obama Thinks We Should Have Fewer Apocalyptic Nuclear Death Toys, Can You Guess Who Disagrees?
Germany is Europe’s Brooklyn’s Williamsburg before Williamsburg got too Williamsburg: good beer, they make cool stuff, not too expensive. So it’s not surprising that budget-conscious culture vulture Barack Obama wanted to pop in and thrill a few legs after another lame G8 summit in London where everybody was so “concerned” about everything and oh look at us, our economies are big. Get over yourselves, said our flashy president, maybe we can hook up in Berlin for the after-party. Which was cool, there was a speech, it was hot, the crowd was not huge, and Obama said he wants to reduce our nuclear arsenal by a third. WHAT?!?!?! MADNESS!!!!!!, was the typical GOP response, because, uh, Obama! is bad. What he said, BAD! Also.
Said Tennessee Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, who we guess normally keeps his head down because we’ve never heard of him: “I’m disappointed in the president … We won the Cold War because we showed nuclear vigilance and diligence. We should remain on that course today," Good point, and we do not question your sincerity even though Oak Ridge nuclear facility is in your district! David Vitter got in on the act, too, because he’s the first guy who comes to mind when you wonder, “To whom should we entrust the management of our vast and incomprehensibly powerful nuclear arsenal?” He said stuff, who cares, just use your imagination. Also Frank Gaffney said stuff about weakness and how if previous American presidents had talked about being part of the international community or reduced nukes, then "we probably wouldn’t see a free Berlin today." Gaffney was an undersecretary in the Defense Department under Ronald Reagan, who once floated the idea, while talking to a communist leader, of eliminating nuclear weapons altogether.
So what would it look like if we ignored them and won Obama another Peace Prize? The New START treaty currently limits us and Russia to 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads each, give or take. This just counts weapons that are fired up and ready to go; it doesn’t include stockpiles. Lop off a third, and that’s over 1,000 fully armed and operational atomic fuck-yer-hole-city-up destroyers of worlds. With an arsenal of that size, it wouldn’t matter if Russia or anyone else had an infinite supply of weapons; if a nukelar shooting war broke out it would still be like being buried alive with nothing but 850 rolls of toilet paper. We'd be left with a few very expensive, very lonely submarines wondering if they should finish blowing up the world or just say MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! and sink themselves.
Because yr Wonkette is weird, we love this archival footage of Soviet nuclear weapons shooting out of silos, off of crazy transporters, falling from planes, blowing up, and just cold rollin’ through gray Siberian towns. Some of those rockets are going into friggin’ space! And the music is from Mars Attacks!, an awesome movie, and it’s perfect! We scoured the comments to figure that out, FOR YOU:
Or you could mute it and play “Multilateral Nuclear Disarmament” by the Beastie Boys -- it’s an awesome departure for them, we think you’ll agree, off their last (?) studio album. Why is yr Wonkette a college radio station all of a sudden?